Historically, most charity law did not extend to volunteers. But as the operating environment for charities has become more complex, regulatory expectations have grown.
Nowadays, volunteers and their host charities are either subject to, or have some relation to, an array of laws and regulatory frameworks: from data protection rules to fundraising regulation; health and safety requirements including safeguarding and anti-terror legislation; and even employment law.
A multitude of regulators are taking an interest in charity volunteering – as well as the Charity Commission, there’s the Information Commissioner’s Office (ICO), the Health and Safety Executive (HSE), the Fundraising Regulator, and various sector-specific bodies such as the Office for Students or the Care Quality Commission.
On top of this, various codes of practice also touch on volunteering, including the Charity Governance Code, Code of Fundraising Practice and sector-specific standards such as the Museum Code of Ethics.
Meanwhile, charities are relying on more volunteers than ever – often to make up for fewer paid staff. The Charity Commission’s latest sector overview from May this year shows that the sector’s 171,369 charities boast 6.53 million volunteers, up from 6.22 million at the end of 2023.
Around seven in 10 charities have volunteers, and they are delivering a larger proportion of services, events and fundraising activities than ever before. But this means they – and the charities that depend on them – also face greater exposure to risk.
So, what types of risk do charities and their volunteers face in today’s world, and how can organisations best protect against these?
Catherine Gage, associate solicitor at Hunters Law, says many of the worst hazards can be avoided by effective management of the volunteer life-cycle: a robust induction which includes volunteer agreements and policies drafted with a clear understanding of how the charity operates in practice; training throughout the volunteer’s tenure; and careful offboarding when they depart.
If a volunteer brings a legal case against a charity – perhaps claiming employment rights or suing for personal injury – the organisation stands a much better chance of successfully defending it if these aspects are evident.
In the event that the charity is unsuccessful in defending the claim, properly structured insurance arrangements should operate to mitigate its liability and any consequent financial loss.
Volunteering is not employment
For a start, charities must be careful that any agreement between the organisation and the volunteer does not create terms or obligations that could imply an employment relationship and trigger statutory rights such as the national minimum wage.
A recent Court of Appeal case brought against the Maritime and Coastguard Agency by a long-serving volunteer, Mr Groom, is a salient example of this.
The tribunal decided that although Groom was not defined as an “employee” under the Employment Rights Act 2025 (ERA), he was a “worker” under the act, largely because he claimed a stipend each time he went out on a rescue, and was issued with payslips and an annual P60.
Gage says that in her experience, most charity volunteers that bring cases to an employment tribunal try to claim rights as a worker, not an employee, as workers don’t need to prove the existence of a full employment contract. “While workers have a more limited range of statutory rights than employees, they still benefit from greater protection than volunteers.”
Vanessa Theed, vice chair of the Heritage Volunteering Group (HVG), agrees it is not uncommon for charity staff to inadvertently create a risk in the way that payments are handled – for example, if expenses are paid in advance, rather than claimed back afterwards.
“You might have a situation where the volunteer worries that they will be out of pocket before their expenses are paid, so a charity pays the volunteer upfront. This can raise uncertainty about whether they’ve actually been paid for their services rather than their expenses. It is rarely deliberate, just a lack of awareness.”
In addition, Gage points out, “payment is not the only thing that can make you an employee”. Volunteer agreements should not generally imply any direction and control (such as putting the volunteer on a rota), any mutuality of obligations, or any integration of the volunteer into the charity.
“If it says: ‘you must turn up at 9am, you must do this work while you’re here, and you are subject to our disciplinary rules and procedures’, that would point towards an employment contract, not a volunteer relationship. There also should not be any retainer between working periods, or any overarching continuity of service.”
Employment relationships can arise through means other than a poorly-drafted volunteer agreement, too. “When we are talking about a contract of employment under the ERA, the act states that it can be ‘expressed or implied’, and ‘implied orally or in writing’,” Gage says. “So that means, God forbid, that you can create an employment contract verbally, or by a series of emails. It doesn’t always have to be a piece of paper that says ‘employment contract’ at the top.”
Giving volunteers benefits or payments in kind can also be risky. These should be limited to genuine expenses or incidental benefits necessary for the role, to avoid being construed as payment in kind.
Faith Hojeer, head of volunteering at Keech Hospice which has 1,500 volunteers across three counties, offers her charity’s take on this: “Because we wanted to make sure we were looking after our volunteers’ wellbeing, they are all on our employee assistance programme so they can access bereavement support, wellbeing support, and advice on financial difficulties. However, they aren’t able to access the HSF Plan, which is an individual health plan that is available to staff only.”
Another benefit that should be considered carefully is training, says Gage. If a volunteer is required to have certain training to carry out their role safely or competently – such as learning aspects of health and safety law or UK GDPR (General Data Protection Regulation) – then that will not confer employee status.
But if training is provided that is not strictly relevant to the role – such as the charity paying for a degree course for a volunteer – that could be counted as a payment in kind and might be considered an employee benefit by a court or tribunal, or HMRC.
Data protection
Two other areas that should feature heavily in a volunteer’s induction and training are data protection, and health and safety. In fact, these are areas where training for volunteers should often be akin to employees undertaking the same tasks, Gage advises.
The ICO expects organisations to keep data safe, and this means volunteers should be trained to the same standards as anyone else in the team if they are processing personal data. And if they are not, the charity must have adequate security in place to ensure that volunteers cannot accidentally access such data.
Hojeer says that volunteers within Keech Hospice who handle patient data are given exactly the same e-learning training as staff. And while volunteers in the hospice’s charity shops are not required to do the same training, they are given training on GDPR as part of their inductions, and all volunteer data is held on a secure volunteer management system.
Of course, volunteers are also recognised as “data subjects” themselves under ICO guidance, with the right to expect that their own personal information will be treated confidentially, and not used in any way that impacts their individual rights and freedoms.
Theed recalls that the heritage sector was prompted to digitise and centralise its data when the Heritage Lottery Fund and other major funders encouraged grantees to collect monitoring and personal information about prospective volunteers as part of their reporting requirements. “When I was at the Natural History Museum, my main role was to implement a new computerised system, because having data stored in different parts of the organisation, sometimes without consistent password protection, created unnecessary risk. So we changed that. We got the volunteers involved, right from our initial discussions, asking them ‘How do you want this to work? How do you feel about it? Do you understand why we’re collecting the information?’ We wanted them to know there was a clear and legitimate reason for doing it.”
Gage says all volunteers should be issued with a privacy notice outlining their data use rights – but too often she sees charities simply giving their volunteers a privacy notice that has been drafted for employees, with the word “employee” substituted with “volunteer”.
“This is a nonsense,” she says, “because under UK GDPR, you need to have a lawful reason for processing someone’s data, and the lawful reason for processing an employee’s data is an employment contract. But volunteers don’t have a contract.”
However, using the alternative defence of “legitimate interest” instead is usually not enough on its own if the ICO decides to take an interest, Gage adds. “Your volunteer privacy notice should identify what data you’re collecting about the volunteer, why it’s necessary, where it’s going, how long you’ll hold it, and to whom it could be transferred.”
Charities should also have a data retention policy and a data breach policy which includes volunteers, and since June this year, under the Data (Use and Access) Act 2025, they are also required to have a complaints procedure covering all aspects of GDPR.
Health and safety
Health and safety is another vital consideration for charities that engage volunteers. In fact, the HSE maintains that in terms of health and safety, organisations should treat volunteers as if they are employees.
The Health and Safety at Work Act 1974 states that charities must take steps to avoid their staff and volunteers being subject to risks to their health and safety, although the HSE advises that such steps should be “reasonably practicable” for a charity to take.
In addition, charities also have responsibilities under RIDDOR (Reporting of Injuries, Diseases and Dangerous Occurrences Regulations), which requires them to report all deaths, major injuries, occupational diseases and near-misses to the HSE.
Many specialist volunteers who provide advice and support on helplines such as Childline or Samaritans are particularly vulnerable to stress and trauma due to the horrific stories they hear. What duty of care do charities owe to these volunteers and how best can they protect them?
Gage explains: “You need to be able to show the HSE that you’ve thought about the risk and taken action to avoid that risk – perhaps by providing counselling and other services. Samaritans, for example, does a wonderful job in the facilities it has put in place to protect people from vicarious trauma.”
Separately, the Charity Commission’s December 2025 hostile environment guidance highlights the need for clear, regular briefing of staff and volunteers to manage risks such as abuse, intimidation, extremism, terrorism and fraud.
And its safeguarding guidance explicitly requires safeguarding arrangements to cover volunteers, recognising them both as people who may be exposed to harm and as individuals whose actions create risk. Charities’ harassment policies should also cover volunteers.
Martyn’s Law
The new Terrorism – Protection of Premises Act 2025, known as Martyn’s Law, sets out duties for organisations running venues or public events to reduce the risk of terrorist attack. These duties differ according to the number of people in the premises and its immediate vicinity, at any one time.
If this number reaches 200 – and this includes staff, volunteers, visitors, contractors, and possibly even members of the public who happen to be nearby – then the charity becomes subject to “standard tier” responsibilities as laid out in the act.
If the number rises to 800, then the “enhanced tier” rules apply, and organisations may need to make physical alterations to their buildings. Gage states: “Charities will need to implement tiered counter-terrorism preparedness by requiring venues to assess risk, train staff, and maintain core procedures (evacuation, invacuation, lockdown, communication), with larger, enhanced-tier sites also documenting plans and adding proportionate security measures such as CCTV, searches, monitoring, or physical alterations to reduce vulnerabilities.”
Charities that stage occasional large events in contained areas, such as fundraising events, open days, or community activities, could find themselves within the scope of the act if enough people attend (although there are exemptions for churches and healthcare settings). Gage points out that “immediate vicinity” could include queues outside your premises, where an incident could realistically affect people connected to the premises.
Gage went through some of the main provisions within the new statutory guidance issued in April 2026 and amended a number of times immediately prior to the roundtable. She added that although the provisions of the act don’t kick in until spring 2027, charities should use this year to collate their attendance statistics and read the guidance to check their responsibilities.
Insurance
If all your best-laid preparations and procedures still fall short, and your charity ends up in a court case involving a volunteer, it will be relieved to have insurance to fall back on.
Charities often have various insurance policies in place, most commonly employer’s liability insurance – which covers legal fees and compensation costs if an employee is injured or falls ill because of their work – and public liability insurance, covering injury or damage claims from a member of the public.
But not all of these will automatically cover claims that are made by or against volunteers, says Gage, so it is advisable to amend these policies – and any others – to ensure they extend to volunteers.
“Go and see a broker, look at all your risks and see if you can cover these with insurance. You don’t have to, but if you’re sued as a charity, it’s good advice. As a trustee, you’re obliged to look after the assets of your charity. So trustees must consider insurance – that’s the bottom line.
“In this day and age we’re seeing increasing risks to technology, and cyber insurance is a key one to have – it will protect you in GDPR to some degree. And make sure this covers your volunteers too.”
Gage says that volunteers “going rogue” can certainly pose an insurance risk to charities, even if their volunteers are specifically included in the charity’s policies, procedures, safety equipment and training. “Say you have a forestry volunteer who swings from a tree without the ropes and harnesses you gave them, and falls and breaks their back. Is the charity liable? In reality, this would be thrashed out between insurance companies. But I would think there would be at least some proportional blame there that would limit the damages in personal injury to the charity.
“But it’s always advisable to state in your volunteering agreement that they should not undertake any activities outside of those specified. If you can show that you gave the volunteer that information, that’s key to reducing your liability later on.”
Compliance vs enjoyment
During the discussion, all the participants highlighted the challenge of balancing the need to ensure volunteers are cognisant of their legal and compliance duties, with the wish to ensure they enjoy their experience.
Jenny Murphy, volunteer manager at Museum of the Home, cautions that it can be overwhelming for volunteers when they first join an organisation to be confronted with a stack of policies and agreements to read – and that it may be unrealistic to expect full comprehension without breaking down topics.
Jacob Przeklasa is global programmes and operations lead at CISV International, an umbrella body that sets and implements operational and volunteering standards and guidelines for member associations across 60+ countries. Previously, he managed volunteering programmes in areas including health, homelessness and local community involvement.
He describes his experience of the “mindset of volunteering” – essentially, the perception among some volunteers that volunteering is a hobby, and not something they need to treat as professionally as they would a paid job. “
Volunteers, understandably, want their experience to be fun,” he says. “And as part of it, they don’t necessarily want to read through loads of policies and procedures or adhere to strict regulations. Sometimes it seems like it is easy for them to forget that if they were asked to do the same activity in their workplace, they would be bound by a high level of compliance and professionalism. When they have their volunteering hat on, they think ‘no, this is just for fun, that doesn’t apply to me’.”
Or, he adds, they can create risk for their charity by straying into activities that go well beyond their role description. “It comes from a good place, generally, because they just want to help. But by throwing themselves into tasks that may require, for example, safeguarding checks or training, they do not seem to see risks that a professional volunteer manager would think about and mitigate for.”
Hojeer highlighted the particular challenge of ensuring that all those in an organisation that manage volunteers have sufficient skills to ensure those in their charge are following the correct procedures and are able to support volunteers well.
Przeklasa, who is also a trustee of the Association of Volunteer Managers (AVM), agreed: “At AVM, we are well aware that there are potentially thousands of people across the sector who have no mention of volunteer management in their job descriptions, and don’t see themselves primarily, or even partially, as volunteer managers, but they very much are. Think park rangers, charity shop managers, fundraising managers, search and rescue boat commanders, ward nurses and so on. It’s foolish to assume that they come into these roles with the same understanding of the legalities of volunteer management as your head of volunteering, and without appropriate training they can inadvertently create all kinds of risks for your organisation.”
Murphy shared her practice of asking all new staff across the museum about their experience of volunteering across the sector, to understand their experience thus far and enable her to address any potential misinformation or negative experience they have encountered.
Theed added that many members of the HVG value learning opportunities on topics such as safeguarding or data protection, because colleagues across their organisations often look to them for guidance and practical understanding in these areas.
Murphy also identified a related risk: that staff may be reluctant to raise a competency issue with a volunteer until matters become severe. She says there is a need to develop softer skills such as coaching among volunteer managers, so that they can help volunteers to improve before matters need escalation. “Often they do see it as a hobby, but you have to balance their enjoyment with making sure they abide by your codes of practice and legal requirements. It has to be mutually beneficial for both them and for your organisation.”
Przeklasa said the discussion served to underline the “absolute minefield” charities have to navigate in trying to manage their volunteers in the face of so many diverse duties and responsibilities, and no definitive set of guidance to rely on. “I think we are blessed to be operating in a sector where most volunteers are positively motivated towards our organisations and mostly give us the benefit of the doubt.”
In response, Gage suggests charities try to familiarise themselves with each issue, law and regulator separately, as each has different requirements and even differing definitions of what a volunteer is.
She also says it is vital to break induction and training down into small chunks and introduce things gradually so the volunteer is not inundated or deterred. “You don’t need to give them everything on their first day.”
Hojeer mentioned that Keech Hospice has an app for its volunteers, containing all relevant documents such as the volunteer agreement, data confidentiality agreement, volunteer handbook and more. “It’s laid out in bite-sized chunks, and is a place they can go back to for reference whenever they want.”
Offboarding
Gage also emphasised the importance of careful “offboarding” when a volunteer leaves their role, “because you want that relationship to be ongoing, and friendly and happy”.
“They’re still going to be donating; perhaps they’re still going to be a member of the charity. So during that offboarding exercise, which should be very informal and friendly, you need to cover elements of the law. For example, for data protection you could cover the data retention obligations very briefly. You could find out whether there are any EDI (equity, diversity and inclusion) issues they’ve discovered where the charity could do better. Offboarding is a superb place for you to find out how their experience went. Did they enjoy it? Were there any legal issues that might crop up? Are there any risks the charity needs to try to avoid? But do it very carefully and subtly.”
G&L wishes to thank Hunters Law for its support with this article
